AVZ Discussion 2022
- Thread starter GazDix
- Start date
Rhyno, the strategy being pursued by AVZ is to negotiate an outcome, failing that, I suspect to then close up shop and pursue legal outcome via ICC/ICISD. I think this should be well understood by everyone by now. I dont think funding is an issue anymore, they've bunkered down for the long haul and will be able to see litigation through if it comes to that.
Negotiations arent going to be disclosed until a deal is done and we arent going to get any updates of note as that will only help our detractors. We just have to trust Nigel and the team and for what little its worth, I continue to do so.
I'm confident if the negotiations dont deliver a positive outcome for shareholders then we will be informed and then we'll all know that we'll need to wait 2+ years to receive any form of settlement via the courts. So until then, we need to wait and I know thats the hard part, we've all been waiting 2+years and its painful for all of us. I do believe though Nigel is in the best position and doing his best to get a positive outcome, so hard as it may be, we all need to stay strong.
regards
This might explain the offer I received for 20 cents by what now appears to be a 3rd party . Initial offer was 15 cents .
Last edited:
David Krappenschitz
Regular
What happened to the 1cent offers? Now 35c? Sounds a little bit desperate to me 
dollarbills
Regular
Who is the 3rd party?
Rediah
Regular
If that is true (unlikely) , why would they want to buy AVZ shares? There has to be a reason if they want to even pay a cent for it let alone 35c, that AVZ is not dead? right?
Chase
Regular
Gold
Chase
Regular
I have said previously there are those among us here on TSE I would not trust as far as I could drop kick them . I will leave it at that .
Samus
Top 20
Only Greenbushes is operating at a profit at the current lithium price. Seems like to me if the Chinese control the price operating Manono then the entire Australian lithium industry is pretty much fucked.
Fucking spineless government isn't doing anything about it.
While they reap what they sow with inaction we might be the only ones to make anything out of the lithium industry eventually through damages from the ICSID arbitration.
Fucking spineless government isn't doing anything about it.
While they reap what they sow with inaction we might be the only ones to make anything out of the lithium industry eventually through damages from the ICSID arbitration.
TheCount
Regular
Reading between the lines, it was 35c for their entire holding not per share..
TC.
Legally though what can they do until found guilty of something in court right?
DRC government would laugh at Aus trying to flex whatever power it thinks it has over there.
Scoota30
Regular
There are many ways our politicians or PM could put pressure on the DRC or to help give the negotiations a "bump". Correct me if i'm wrong but we have publicly seen ministers or delegations from EU,US & China make public statements & travel to the DRC. Other than our ambassador (Based out of zimbabwe lol & that took long enough to happen) i don't think there have been any aus ministers that have gone over there trying to help? All we have heard or seen is that they "continue to follow and monitor the case" i.e fuckall and watching from a distance.
Like Samus said above, China as a whole is continuing to hemorrhage the global critical mineral industry and in doing so is affecting other australia businesses/industries but the entire west is too focused on trying to be inclusive, diverse, equitable and politically correct rather than showing force to actually combat china. makes me sick watching it happen in realtime.
“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.”
It was an attempt to overthrow the BoD not buy up the company . The Chinese were prepared to throw several million $$ at it . IMO
Frank
Top 20
Critical minerals, Western security and the case for US leadership
As the world awaits the US Presidential election debate on 10 September, the two candidates Donald Trump and Kamala Harris might reflect on the words of President Dwight Eisenhower, seventy years ago, when he quipped “I have two kinds of problems, the urgent and the important.The urgent are not important, and the important are never urgent”.
Eisenhower’s reflection came one year into his presidency. With an armistice ending the Korean War, he faced an economy emerging from recession, Communists occupying Hanoi and an obscure army officer, Gamal Abdel Nasser, seizing power in Egypt.
His quip became part of the lexicon of business and political leaders, seeking to distil long from short-term priorities amidst the blizzard of issues competing for their time.
Today, one strategic imperative for the US (and the West) is becoming increasingly urgent, namely the vulnerability of supply chains, and in particular the critical minerals vital for electric vehicles, battery storage and the wider energy transition.
The International Energy Agency estimates that we need an extra $800 billion of investment in new mining projects by 2040 to meet the 1.5 °C target.
To appreciate the scale of the challenge, compare critical minerals to oil, with its historically fraught impact on international relations.
Whilst no single country has more than a 15% share of oil supply, China has a more than 80% share in gallium, magnesium, tungsten, to take just three critical minerals – and controls almost all the mines in the Democratic Republic of Congo which produces over 70% of cobalt.
The West is 20 years behind China, which avails itself of the subsidies, price control and long-term planning that only a command economy can, creating a massive cost of capital disadvantage for Western investors.
In such a concentrated market, over-production – take nickel – can deflate the price artificially, undermining Western investment despite massive long-term demand. It is now a major geopolitical fault line, exposing Western vulnerability.
What plans do candidates Trump and Harris have to redress the balance?
There is bi-partisan support in the US Congress for the strategic goals of friend-shoring the extraction and refinement of critical minerals to bolster economic resilience.
The Rubio-Warner Global Strategy for Securing Critical Minerals Act 2024 proposes adding to the US government’s financial toolkit to leverage greater investment and expanding diplomatic initiatives to diversify supply chains.
Meanwhile, former President Trump’s vow to repeal the subsidy-funnelling Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) may be tempered by Congressional opposition. Recent analysis found that 80% of IRA investments have landed in Republican states.
My experience chairing, on behalf of Appian Capital Advisory, a group of investors advising US policy-makers via the organisation Securing America’s Future Energy, suggests an effective strategy requires three pillars. First, stronger policy levers to level the playing field.
The current US administration is considering demand-side tools like contracts-for-difference, fixed price floors, and loan guarantees to try to off-set the cost of capital disadvantage Western firms face.
The aim of promoting a race to the top – with the highest ESG standards in mining reflected in investor pricing – is laudable.
It remains to be seen how such a ‘premium’ market would work in practice, and whether it would be attractive to developing countries currently benefiting from China’s Belt and Road investments.
Whatever the mix of grants, loans, guarantees, tariffs, export restrictions and other tools, mitigating CapEx costs is the greatest conundrum.
Second, friend-shoring needs to be more ambitious.
The US, let alone its allies, cannot be individually self-sufficient. We need to forge wider clusters of high-trust partnerships to provide broader, end-to-end supply chains.
The Five Eyes intelligence and security alliance of the US, UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand could expand its scope to cover critical minerals security – given the breadth of resources and capacities each brings to the table.
Japan too, is a key high trust partner in this space.
Next, the US-lead Mineral Security Partnership (MSP), comprising America’s core transatlantic and Pacific allies, must reach beyond its comfort zone.
The admission of India, a pivotal non-aligned power, brings the number to 15. But can we coax linchpin producers like Brazil, Peru, The Philippines, Saudi Arabia and Indonesia into the MSP?
Finally, we need better public-private partnerships. Businesses can bring investor acumen, technical expertise, innovation and high ESG standards.
For example, Appian Capital Advisory has invested in US Strategic Metals in Missouri, not just to mine and process nickel, lithium, copper and cobalt, but also to introduce state-of-the-art recycling of lithium-ion batteries.
For its part, in addition to financial support, governments need to streamline permitting, and collaborate better to provide diplomatic and security assurances, and deploy aid in ways that support supply chains – for example, financing roads, rail and port infrastructure in developing countries.
As I meet with governments and businesses in the US, Japan and Australia this month, these are the important and urgent challenges we will be discussing – and the next US President will have to overcome.
mining.com
Need to preserve cash . No AGM for you .
Mute22
Regular
I can’t afford the flights to Perth anyway.
There will inevitably be western pressure being exerted for such a massive and critical resource.
'The West' has long since woken up to China's aims and MO.
I remember discussing China's shenanigans with a mate 5 or 6 years ago, before they messed with Oz, as he complained about their effect on his business. I just said the west will gang up on China when they wake up.
That is already happening, but needs to increase.
The Lobito corridor is not being financed out of altruism.
China ( and by that I mean the CCP - which is behind this ) are probably hoping that incrementally making it more difficult for AVZ, whilst also attempting to attain a fait accompli on the ground, will win this war.
The corrupt DRC politicians are just in it for personal and , importantly, clan gain which is why they have no fear of being held to account. Ever.
If they are, then they'll do an Idi Amin.
Google him.
So now we wait.
Personally, I think that we will win this as AVZ will not be allowed to go bust.
The two pertinent questions are:
How long will this process take?
and what will our shares be worth / what payout will we get?
That I'm not confident about.
The next elephant in the room is the AGM in only 10 or 12 weeks.
I wonder how many shares have changed hands and what carnage that will allow our enemies to cause.
Similar threads
